I was relearning LaTeX, the typesetting language. I wanted to express some equations from quantum mechanics. The notation defines a "bra" as because together they make a "bra-ket" (Dirac probably had way too much free time on his hands when he came up with that). Anyway I did a google search for
"latex bra ket". The search results were useful but I was at first surprised by the ads that showed up.
Thus, every professor on campus is now taking
attendence this way.
No fun anymore, because you must attened every class, or your grade automaticaly drops.
Call me a grammar/spelling Nazi if you like, but it seems to me that you might have benefited from attending more classes.
Yes, but the only urgent part of this project is recovering the data.
In theory for far less you could simply recover the data, test that it was recovered properly, and then stick it on a webpage for anybody in the world to analyze.
TFF said:
Will the data be made publicly available?
Yes. First, the data first must be recovered, validated, documented, and preliminary analyses must be done. After those tasks are completed (probably taking months to a year), the data will be made publicly available, including second-order data products when the raw data is processed by JPL orbit software.
I am a scientist and I have worked on analyzing large data sets such as this before. The tricky part is what you describe as "test that it was recovered properly". This is what TFF described as "preliminary analyses".
It would be foolish for a programmer to publish a program on the web without first running it a few times to catch bugs. In the same way, a scientist must check her data (even "raw" data) before just blindly putting it up on the web for all to see. If she posts faulty data then she wastes everyone's time, she looks like a fool and pisses a lot of people off. Her reputation may be ruined.
But how can she know for sure that the data was recovered properly? Checking parity bits is not nearly enough, because she needs to know for sure that she did not make any subtle mistakes and that no one in the chain of generating and producing the data made any subtle mistakes.
One necessary (but not sufficient) step is to actually analyze the data with your model(s) and see if it makes sense. If it doesn't, then you may need correct your transcription procedure and go back to the original tapes and read them again.
Transferring the data for $10K and not doing the preliminary analysis would be foolish beyond belief. I think a better cost estimate is roughly $100K for the transfer(s) and preliminary analysis needed to ensure the transfer was done properly. Since everything would already be set up to analyze the data it makes perfect sense to also get another $100K to do the "real" analysis. Since something may well go wrong, ask for another $50K so you can be reasonably sure of getting it done right in the first go round.
They [SCO] must have at least some sort of case for the trial to have got this far.
Sorry, that's incorrect. But, you do get this watch and a year's supply of turtle wax.
I am not claiming that Groklaw is impartial but they do have a lot of facts there that you can go check. You might be interested in reading Judge Kimball ruling (from February 2005) where he expressed astonishment that SCO has not yet presented one shred of evidence that IBM has done anything wrong.
I wish we lived in a world where all the publisher need do is ask politely that no copies of the book be sold before midnight and everyone respected their request.
But in our media hyped world, that is just not going to happen.
I fully support Scholastic's decision to take what steps are necessary to try to ensure that everyone gets an equal shot at reading the book before it gets spoiled all over the press.
It is too bad that they need to do all of these things to give everyone an equal shot, but that is hardly Scholastic's fault. If they didn't take these measures, we would be calling them morons for not taking reasonable precautions.
In fact, they would probably get their asses sued off by unhappy readers.
What if, based on some objective criteria, the number of innovations per person was actually increasing? This may not be true but it is not an unreasonable assumption. If you couple that with the exponential population growth then any reasonable "History of Science" will have to skew the contents to stress older innovations over newer ones, otherwise it will mostly contain innovations from the past few years and not be a history at all.
The number of innovations per person may be rising, or falling, or holding steady. But one thing's for sure: you won't be able to figure it by using a history book.
... but while composing that post, it occurred to me that this is actually a very good idea and should be explored.
The premise of the existing Internet was benign cooperation. The previous/. story on the 12 minute Windows heist clearly demonstrates that that model is no longer valid.
I think it is a good time to take a look at all of the layers and see if something better is possible.
I am not suggesting that Clark et. al. be given Carte Blanche to build a new Internet. The naysayers may well be right that any significant change would be practically impossible. But I do think it is a very good idea to investigate what changes are possible and what benefits those changes could provide. I'd hope that practical concerns of getting from here to there would also be explored.
Until developers (and pundits) realize that not mouses and menus a user friendly interface make, the sooner computers won't be more difficult to use than they need be.
We can see that text based interfacing is not your forte.
You raise a good point with Hanlon's Razor. Perhaps I should have made my original post more clear.
I don't think FOX was being dogmatic. I think it was being stupid, just like the US car manufacturers were being stupid in the 70's.
The car companies pushed large cars in the 70's because those were the kinds of cars the top execs liked. All the people the top execs associated with (big surprise: other top execs) also liked large cars.
One grand-parent of this thread claimed that FOX bought Sci-Fi shows in order to cancel them, some sort of dogmatic anti-Sci-Fi-ism. There is certainly a clear pattern of cancellation of certain types of shows and pushing of others.
I am proposing a mechanism of a certain sort of corporate stupidity that explains the weird pattern of cancellations. If the top execs at FOX find these shows distasteful (much like the top car execs found small cars distasteful) then those shows are not going to get as much of a corporate push as shows that the top brass likes better. Not because the top brass has a dogmatic corporate agenda to cancel those shows (even though it might appear that way), but because they don't think the shows are good.
Some fledgling shows with an anti-fascist message get started at FOX, just like a few small model US cars got made in the 70's. But in both cases the product did not appeal to the top brass and was left to wither and die. And in both cases the same products sold like hotcakes when they were promoted by other companies with a different corporate mindset.
Why would they spend the money just to ditch a show? Is Rupert Murdoch on some sort of anti-SF [crusade]?
The short answer is that FOX crunched Firefly and other shows like it because they didn't like the political message of those shows.
But FOX is a large corporation, not a single individual. At the risk of Goodwinning myself, the politics of FOX as demonstrated by FOXnews, or their current darling, 24, is extremely right-wing bordering on fascism: fear, pro-torture, and anti-human-rights.
Shows like Firefly or Dark Angel or even Wonderfalls are championed by younger execs who are not fully indoctrinated in the politics of FOX. Once these shows get started, more and more people in the FOX organization are involved in making decisions that affect the fate of these shows.
As the anti-fascist message of these shows becomes more clear to the FOX organization, the shows are silently squashed.
I would be extremely surprised if anti-anti-fascism at FOX was spoken of as such. I very much doubt there was ever a memo that said this show is too anti-fascist, cancel it!. Instead there is a mindset that pervades upper management that finds these shows distasteful but can't explain exactly why.
A very similar thing happened to the US car companies about 30 years ago (as documented by the New York Times Magazine). The upper management of all the US car companies were living in their own insulated world and were totally out of touch with the common-man/woman. So they keep making HUGE cars and got creamed by the Japanese who were making good smaller cars that more Americans wanted.
But Mr. Drobbins we have your digital signature here on a pdf document that says you came here to help us undermine Open Source and community-based projects.
You are obviously not new here even though you appear to be by expecting me to be actually answering your questions.
I can tell you are not new because you are not even reading your own posts before responding to my replies. You asked three questions:
Ok, so where's the computer with Linux installed out-of-the-box? The one Wal-Mart sells? Does async sound work in Linspire without any configuration on a Wal-Mart PC? (Seriously, I don't know, does it?)
I answered the first two questions by giving you a link to what I consider to be a reliable source of computers with Linux pre-installed. Your response was to say I:
"completely, utterly ignored the only question in [your] post".
Sheesh. Calm down so we can have a rational discussion. Opps, sorry, I forgot for a moment that this is/.
Take a look at Emperor Linux. They sell laptops with Linux pre-installed.
If you are complaining about the lack of availability of computers with Linux pre-installed then I suggest you direct your complaints not at the Linux devs but rather at
Microsoft, whose monopolistic practices are still paying them dividends. Better still, complain to the US Justice Department for letting Microsoft off with a wrist slap after they were convicted.
Perhaps the most effective place to complain would be to the EU who are still tussling with Microsoft over their monopolistic practices.
Uh, yeah, but that applies to Windows and OS X as well, but OS X and Windows can play multi-channel sound with no latency out of the box. What's Linux's excuse?
You're talking about two totally different friggin' kinds of boxes here my friend.
The Windows and OS X boxes you are referring to are boxes that contains a computer with the operating system already installed. The Linux box you are referring to is a box (or download) containing software that needs to be manually installed.
To make a fair comparison, either comparing installing XP or OS-X from scratch to installing a Linux distro from scratch, or compare a computer that already has an OS installed with another computer that has a different OS already installed.
The argument (made by other posters) saying that Linux will never be able to compete until Joe Sixpack can install it from scratch is either stupid or malicious, or both.
It will no longer be neccessary to write or even compile software for any particular hardware configuration.
What will happen to the Gentoo distribution and all of those USE flags that control what gets compiled? Will Gentoo become meaningless or will all distribution become like Gentoo?
I wonder why we get these trolls posted to the front page? Would troll.slashdot.org be a better section place for this that we can deselect in preferences?
Even if no stories get put there, just by giving the editors this option, it might make them pause half a second and think (or god forbid read) before posting such anti-Linux FUD stories on the front page.
The editors are perpetuating the FUD problem not just by feeding the anti-Linux trolls, but by burying them in a month's supply of tasty troll-chow every time a story like this hits the front page.
Slashdot Mirror
I was relearning LaTeX, the typesetting language. I wanted to express some equations from quantum mechanics. The notation defines a "bra" as because together they make a "bra-ket" (Dirac probably had way too much free time on his hands when he came up with that). Anyway I did a google search for "latex bra ket". The search results were useful but I was at first surprised by the ads that showed up.
Call me a grammar/spelling Nazi if you like, but it seems to me that you might have benefited from attending more classes.
It would be foolish for a programmer to publish a program on the web without first running it a few times to catch bugs. In the same way, a scientist must check her data (even "raw" data) before just blindly putting it up on the web for all to see. If she posts faulty data then she wastes everyone's time, she looks like a fool and pisses a lot of people off. Her reputation may be ruined.
But how can she know for sure that the data was recovered properly? Checking parity bits is not nearly enough, because she needs to know for sure that she did not make any subtle mistakes and that no one in the chain of generating and producing the data made any subtle mistakes.
One necessary (but not sufficient) step is to actually analyze the data with your model(s) and see if it makes sense. If it doesn't, then you may need correct your transcription procedure and go back to the original tapes and read them again.
Transferring the data for $10K and not doing the preliminary analysis would be foolish beyond belief. I think a better cost estimate is roughly $100K for the transfer(s) and preliminary analysis needed to ensure the transfer was done properly. Since everything would already be set up to analyze the data it makes perfect sense to also get another $100K to do the "real" analysis. Since something may well go wrong, ask for another $50K so you can be reasonably sure of getting it done right in the first go round.
J.R.R. Tolkien said:
Sorry, that's incorrect. But, you do get this watch and a year's supply of turtle wax.
I am not claiming that Groklaw is impartial but they do have a lot of facts there that you can go check. You might be interested in reading Judge Kimball ruling (from February 2005) where he expressed astonishment that SCO has not yet presented one shred of evidence that IBM has done anything wrong.
I fully support Scholastic's decision to take what steps are necessary to try to ensure that everyone gets an equal shot at reading the book before it gets spoiled all over the press.
It is too bad that they need to do all of these things to give everyone an equal shot, but that is hardly Scholastic's fault. If they didn't take these measures, we would be calling them morons for not taking reasonable precautions. In fact, they would probably get their asses sued off by unhappy readers.
What if, based on some objective criteria, the number of innovations per person was actually increasing? This may not be true but it is not an unreasonable assumption. If you couple that with the exponential population growth then any reasonable "History of Science" will have to skew the contents to stress older innovations over newer ones, otherwise it will mostly contain innovations from the past few years and not be a history at all.
The number of innovations per person may be rising, or falling, or holding steady. But one thing's for sure: you won't be able to figure it by using a history book.
The premise of the existing Internet was benign cooperation. The previous /. story on the 12 minute Windows heist clearly demonstrates that that model is no longer valid.
I think it is a good time to take a look at all of the layers and see if something better is possible. I am not suggesting that Clark et. al. be given Carte Blanche to build a new Internet. The naysayers may well be right that any significant change would be practically impossible. But I do think it is a very good idea to investigate what changes are possible and what benefits those changes could provide. I'd hope that practical concerns of getting from here to there would also be explored.
Channeling Yoda perchance?
... as the web site crawls to a halt.
I don't think FOX was being dogmatic. I think it was being stupid, just like the US car manufacturers were being stupid in the 70's.
The car companies pushed large cars in the 70's because those were the kinds of cars the top execs liked. All the people the top execs associated with (big surprise: other top execs) also liked large cars.
One grand-parent of this thread claimed that FOX bought Sci-Fi shows in order to cancel them, some sort of dogmatic anti-Sci-Fi-ism. There is certainly a clear pattern of cancellation of certain types of shows and pushing of others.
I am proposing a mechanism of a certain sort of corporate stupidity that explains the weird pattern of cancellations. If the top execs at FOX find these shows distasteful (much like the top car execs found small cars distasteful) then those shows are not going to get as much of a corporate push as shows that the top brass likes better. Not because the top brass has a dogmatic corporate agenda to cancel those shows (even though it might appear that way), but because they don't think the shows are good.
Some fledgling shows with an anti-fascist message get started at FOX, just like a few small model US cars got made in the 70's. But in both cases the product did not appeal to the top brass and was left to wither and die. And in both cases the same products sold like hotcakes when they were promoted by other companies with a different corporate mindset.
The short answer is that FOX crunched Firefly and other shows like it because they didn't like the political message of those shows.
But FOX is a large corporation, not a single individual. At the risk of Goodwinning myself, the politics of FOX as demonstrated by FOXnews, or their current darling, 24, is extremely right-wing bordering on fascism: fear, pro-torture, and anti-human-rights.
Shows like Firefly or Dark Angel or even Wonderfalls are championed by younger execs who are not fully indoctrinated in the politics of FOX. Once these shows get started, more and more people in the FOX organization are involved in making decisions that affect the fate of these shows. As the anti-fascist message of these shows becomes more clear to the FOX organization, the shows are silently squashed.
I would be extremely surprised if anti-anti-fascism at FOX was spoken of as such. I very much doubt there was ever a memo that said this show is too anti-fascist, cancel it!. Instead there is a mindset that pervades upper management that finds these shows distasteful but can't explain exactly why.
A very similar thing happened to the US car companies about 30 years ago (as documented by the New York Times Magazine). The upper management of all the US car companies were living in their own insulated world and were totally out of touch with the common-man/woman. So they keep making HUGE cars and got creamed by the Japanese who were making good smaller cars that more Americans wanted.
You need to read the 5th Amendment more closely. It says:
Since this was clearly a case of taking private property for private use, the 5th Amendment does not apply.
</tongue>
This is going to be the best prom ever.
I can tell you are not new because you are not even reading your own posts before responding to my replies. You asked three questions:
I answered the first two questions by giving you a link to what I consider to be a reliable source of computers with Linux pre-installed. Your response was to say I:
Sheesh. Calm down so we can have a rational discussion. Opps, sorry, I forgot for a moment that this is /.
If you are complaining about the lack of availability of computers with Linux pre-installed then I suggest you direct your complaints not at the Linux devs but rather at Microsoft, whose monopolistic practices are still paying them dividends. Better still, complain to the US Justice Department for letting Microsoft off with a wrist slap after they were convicted.
Perhaps the most effective place to complain would be to the EU who are still tussling with Microsoft over their monopolistic practices.
You're talking about two totally different friggin' kinds of boxes here my friend.
The Windows and OS X boxes you are referring to are boxes that contains a computer with the operating system already installed. The Linux box you are referring to is a box (or download) containing software that needs to be manually installed.
To make a fair comparison, either comparing installing XP or OS-X from scratch to installing a Linux distro from scratch, or compare a computer that already has an OS installed with another computer that has a different OS already installed.
The argument (made by other posters) saying that Linux will never be able to compete until Joe Sixpack can install it from scratch is either stupid or malicious, or both.
What will happen to the Gentoo distribution and all of those USE flags that control what gets compiled? Will Gentoo become meaningless or will all distribution become like Gentoo?
Even if no stories get put there, just by giving the editors this option, it might make them pause half a second and think (or god forbid read) before posting such anti-Linux FUD stories on the front page.
The editors are perpetuating the FUD problem not just by feeding the anti-Linux trolls, but by burying them in a month's supply of tasty troll-chow every time a story like this hits the front page.
That punishes everyone who reads the dupe.
But perhaps I am overreacting and you were merely feeling playful and punnish.
Nope. He is obviously an overclocker running SMP and he is referring to the rare condition where all of his CPU's melt at once.
... but they don't mention the terrible risks.
127.0.0.1 coldfusion.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 dotnet.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 eclipse.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 issj.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 itsolutions.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 jdj.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 linux.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 linuxbusinessweek.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 mxdj.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 pbdj.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 symbian.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 weblogic.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 webservices.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 websphere.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 wireless.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 www.sys-con.tv
127.0.0.1 xml.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 www.linuxworld.com
127.0.0.1 www.sys-con.com